SynthesisBMC health services research2026
A systematic review and meta-analysis of knowledge, attitude, and practice survey on materiovigilance among healthcare professionals.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Materiovigilance: Knowledge, attitude, practice among healthcare professionals in India.Bioinformation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) of Materiovigilance among Healthcare Professionals (HCPs) vary in nature. Inadequate awareness about Materiovigilance among HCPs restricts the effective reporting and monitoring of medical device-related adverse events.
objectiveThis study aimed to analyse the current status of KAP of Materiovigilance activities among healthcare professionals in the clinical setting. METHODOLOGY: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases to assess the KAP of materiovigilance. The research studies reported on knowledge, attitude, and practice among doctors, Nurses, pharmacists, Medical Students, and allied HCPs related to Materiovigilance among HCPs were included. The quality assessment was conducted by using AXIS tool. Commonly reported questions from included studies were pooled to calculate proportions of correct and incorrect responses across the KAP domains for meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare KAP across different healthcare professional groups. Sensitivity analysis and Publication bias were conducted to assess the heterogeneity among the studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using R Software Version 4.5.2.
resultsA total of 3,322 articles were retrieved, and 22 were found to be relevant eligible for full-text screening. A total of 19 studies were finally included in the meta-analysis. In the Knowledge domain, pooled prevalence revealed that 42% of healthcare professionals (95% CI 32–52%; p < 0.0001) were unaware of the ongoing materiovigilance programme. Overall, 94% (95% CI 91–96%; p < 0.0001) of healthcare professionals showed a positive attitude toward the statement that adverse event reporting will enhance patient safety. However, only 17% (95% CI 12–24%; p < 0.0001) of healthcare professionals have engaged in adverse event reporting practices. Only 19% (95% CI 10–34%; p < 0.0001) of healthcare professionals have participated in materiovigilance training programmes.
conclusionThis meta-analysis concludes that HCPs have moderate level of knowledge and overwhelmingly positive attitudes, but only, limited number of HCPs reported adverse events. The Continuous Medical Education and training sessions should be arranged for the HCPs to improve their awareness and practice. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD420251082873.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.